I would like to know how to reformat my submitted setting. i am pretty new to this whole thing...

P.S.~ sorry about completely over-riding your touch-ups, i meant to only make minor corrections, but you see i was in th emiddle of adding a lot of information on the playable races at the time, and i was getting very frustrated at the fact that every time i had an editing conlict, i had to pretty much write everything again. leastways the equivalent amount of work on it, what with taking out the dashes and spaces, and putting in the HTML... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ChieftainTwilight (talk • contribs) 15:06, 28 February 2010 (MST). Please sign your posts!

First if you press the back button it will retrieve the information you had been typing. Just Copy+Paste into the new version (with some minor editing if needed) and continue posting. Edit conflicts are not really a problem as such except for minor formatting or minor changes which deal with the other user's changes. What do I think of Mysteries of Andor? I find that nothing is really fluffed out. I recommend that you make the deities and then link to them from that page. Although you say many names, what I mean is, what are they? --Green Dragon 04:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure you've already been alerted, but just in case, the Mediawiki pictures are not showing up, and Mediawiki comes up saying there is an "Exception caught in Exception Handler". It's not working at all. Jwguy 05:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Would it be possible to have only IP and non-autoconfirmed users have to fill out the captcha when inserting external links? There are a butt-ton of d20 Modern stubs, but since the "edit this page" is treated as an external link, I have to fill out a captcha for every stub template. JazzMan 02:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure you're aware, but I'm just letting you know of some other problems I'm finding since the server crash. First of all, the site is sllllloooooooowww. Sometimes it will be zippy, sometimes you will wait 10 seconds and get a "something went wrong" message, but other times, like right now, it will take literally minutes (sometimes up to 5) to open up a page. Which is just an eternity when you are trying to add a class.

Secondly, no pictures from mediawiki are being loaded correctly. They all just give the name of the image with a link, instead of actually showing the image.

I know. I have been told that the current MW install has many problems with it and lead to slowing down the site sometimes. Media will be dealt with. Another thing too, to make this even better (time wise), is that I just heard that MW has serious security flaws and needs to be upgraded. Maybe upgrading will fix many of the problems which are slowing it down sometimes too. And then if it keeps being slow sometimes then I will think of something else. Hopefully wednesday things will get better (this weekend did not happpen). Sometime though, I can promise. --Green Dragon 03:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that sucks. At least you've got a culprit and a likely fix, though. The worst thing about misbehaving technology is when you don't know what's going wrong. Maybe having a slow wiki will give me time to catch up on some of the things I'm ignoring while I'm spending too much time here :)JazzMan 05:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That's not what I said, but sure. --Green Dragon 05:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I might know why the spam problem has exploded lately: the Captcha doesn't seem to be working. When you add external links there's no captcha prompt at all. JazzMan 20:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

That's because, as was said above, ReCaptcha's were showing up for stub, etc templates for users and external links for users. With MW one cannot just say "IP's have them" anymore, it is now for edit types or somesuch for all but users but those in the admin group. In any case they have been removed as such. Maybe if it continues to be a problem. --Green Dragon 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't help but notice the large drop in admins, as of late, for whatever reasons be it. And though I hardly have any standing, nor say in the matter, I suggest some sort of action should be taken to renew the community on this wiki, before its community dies down too much to have any hope of revival. And still, I have little idea as to how to do so, I've seen many great communities fall and shrivel. So I'm convinced that unless someone gets out there and attracts some people into the community, not just general traffic into the site, the community will break down, maintenence and upkeep will fall, and I fear this great wiki could fall into a bad state.

Well, just my thoughts, I thought you should know. I could be terribly wrong and there's a constant amount of community and I'm totally paranoid and pessimistic. But this is how I see it, seeing the constant destruction of admins with no new ones does worry me. --SgtLion 21:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

What are admins? Do they help? Although I have done no research into the subject I almost feel that ones editing decreases once attaining adminship. Do we need more admins? Yes. Of the top of my head I can maybe think of two or more people who need to be RfA'ed. Know someone? Ask them and then, depending on the result, RfA them please. --Green Dragon 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. I don't know anyone, but your point is very much valid. --SgtLion 06:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I had a discussion on the WotC boards about all the absence of errata for a lot of the previous editions books. For most of these unofficial errata were collected by players.

My thoughts were that a wiki would be a good place to maintain such unofficial errata, given the transient nature of the WotC boards (most of the older errata threads have been purged). D&D Wiki seems the most natural place to start such an endeavor.

Is this something you would be willing to accommodate, as I'm not sure it fits entirely with your current content?

I don't think I've ever contributed here, but I'm a regular at several other wiki's and would try to gather as many unofficial errata as possible if you'd give a green light to such an undertaking.

I will try to check back at this page for an answer every now and then, other options like e-mail, I can post if you want to.

Yes, it would work. Is errata for OGC OGC? I would imagine so. In any case, a good place to start, (especially if it is unofficial errata) is to just make the page and link to it from the publication. Start by taking a look at Publication List and finding the book (or adding it if it is not added) and then placing a link on the page. For example Exemplars of Evil/Unofficial Errata. Does that make sense? Do you think that would work? --Green Dragon 21:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I didn't see any 'Contact us' options, and I noticed that you were the owner, so I decided to stop by and ask a quick question :). Recently this site has been experiencing more and more problems (i.e. not being able to load properly or going down for short periods of time). I just thought I would point this out and wonder if anything could be done?

Oh, and I just want to add, I love this site! Be proud! Thanks! --Vrail 05:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

First we need to clean up this site. For example, at this moment, 3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells spells is not able to load. Why is this? The code is not properly done (SMW and so), I think. In any case it returns a database error and eats up a lot of the server. Once all the code problems have been ironed out then we can see if this is still a problem.

This should happen slowly. Soon D&D Wiki's MW will be upgraded (the current version has a few security problems) and that should make a difference. Then other areas need to be worked on. I hope this helps answer your question, and I look forward to seeing some of your content. --Green Dragon 19:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

What do you think of this preload/template as a way to standardize ranged weapons? It's the format used in Weapons Locker, and the most useful format I've seen.

MoI: Category talk:Rifle (Note also that Category:Longarm actually exists; possibly my next project should be standardizing the categorization of the Modern side of things? Where should such discussion take place?)

Sorry about the long list, but I think that should get us caught up to date. JazzMan 17:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I copy-pasted your prototype page for D20 Modern Equipment onto that page. I changed a few things. Do you think the changes make sense? I modernized the subpages. Once all the subpages are created (so called Phase 2) then D20 Modern Equipment can be cleaned up. I will deal with the rest of your comment above soon... --Green Dragon 22:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

The changes make sense, though in a perfect world the last two categories (not categorized by age or type) should always be empty, correct? Perhaps this is a good way to make sure that everything gets labeled. For the "all" category (I thought about something similar myself), do you want to create a separate page with every PL X item, or just link to the PL X category, which is effectively the same thing? While we're on the subject of the "all" category, I notice some of the totals (PL 2 and 5) don't add up right. I'll try to figure out what's happened; probably something isn't categorized correctly.

The only things I really don't like are adding "equipment" to all the pages, because it gets wordy, and removing the PL number from each line of the table. The former isn't really a huge deal, since users probably won't ever type that anyway, but the second is bigger. All of the books (as well as the MSRD) refer to PL primarily by number, not by name, so I think it's better to have the number actually there instead of counting up or down.

I hope to get to adding the subpages sometime soon. It'll be a function of how much my carpal tunnel is flaring up and how bored I get... JazzMan 00:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Alright, subpages are finished, though as I said before, I'm not sure what to do with some of the pages.

Have any comments on the rest of my points yet?

Also, I think a database has crashed. Every time I try to move a page or use the search I get the following error: 145: Table './ddwikidb/wdd_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired (localhost)JazzMan 19:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

That database problem is no longer a problem.

D20 Modern Equipment looks good. I only wonder about maybe making the all page split by way of the improving, reviewing, or removing templates. I guess we should discuss that there though.

I still have not made up my mind about what should happen to the edition-specific items which were moved to another edition. The others things I responded to, and see below.

With regard to the preloads please feel free to add them, something is better is nothing. They can always be improved throughout time of course. --Green Dragon 03:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I've actually been creating preloads as I see they've been missing. JazzMan 01:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I was hoping to place a certain picture on one of the pages that I'm going to design for my camapign setting. However, this picture has nudity in it. It's not pornographic, a female witch is simply naked. I was wondering if I would be allowed to post this? Or should I send it to you first for clearing? --Vrail 05:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Just a couple things I'd like to ask you about. You mentioned that my class wasn't original and that it's been created before, yet if you search on this web site it's the only one that comes up. Umm? Just wondering about that, cuz I wouldn't know it's unoriginal if nothing else like it is on here. Another question, you mentioned that the Sith aren't all dark users. I took the definition of what a Sith was directly off of the star wars database, so take them up on it if you're really confused about what a Sith is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tmblake09 (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts!

Urm, Green Dragon didn't say any of those things. Vrail said it was unoriginal (and unless you are George Lucas, any Sith class is by definition unoriginal), and he was also the one who suggested there were good and evil Sith. Generally if you have a problem with a specific article, it's best to take it up on that talk page and not a user talk page -- otherwise, people who look at your class later won't see this discussion.

You've edited a comment I've left on a page. on PokeDM's Talk page. You cropped it down, citing solicitation. I'm forced to say "Not Cool". I went out of my way to not solicit any other websites. I didn't drop a name. I didn't provide a link. Furthermore, I read through the behavioral policy just now and didn't see anything banning solicitation. I was trying to be helpful to a new user, letting him know that other people have tried similar endeavors, and there is help for him if he needs it. --Badger 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I have never said we do not edit comments. Comments are edited when needed. What you are doing is spam (Article Spam), links to D&D resources can be found on DnD Links; no where else. Partial censorship is something D&D Wiki has — to keep spam and non-relevant things at bay. All the recent spam from IP's (see the barnstars some have received) is not allowed — I think you would understand. It could become a serious problem.

For example (not notice if you saw it) there was some spam advertising a certain boots company. If I recall correctly they supplied no links. Do you see the problem? It's very simple to understand. --Green Dragon 03:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I think he was just confused and dismayed at why you modified his post and never explained why. Poor communication on both sides resulted in a misunderstanding, but I don't think either side was intentionally being aggressive or anything like that. Anyways, no need to start a feud over a misunderstanding. :). --Vrail 04:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, but you should also mention that no reason needs to be given in text format (maybe in the edit summary). I see what you mean when you mention this, and for the most part the IP (when violating this) knows though his or her ban. Since this user is not getting banned as a result of his or her solicitation (implicit or explicit), you should notice that just the censorship was hinting at this. Since he or she did not, and actually took this kind gesture the wrong way, now he or she knows is all we can say. As a general rule one should always read the edit summaries, and I hope we can say that if something gets censored with such a reason in the edit summary that is the reason. Seems very simple to understand, but I guess not. --Green Dragon 04:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

To be fair Vrail, I was much more aggressive (intentionally) at the end of my comment up there. You just aren't seeing it because it was censored... Anyway, yeah, I was angry because my comment was edited. I don't see how a useful, on-topic, offer of help from an external resource (which was not linked or named) from a registered, contributing user on a fellow user's Talk page should be compared to spam about cheap boots on SRD talk pages. --Badger 04:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Why was it solicitation? Because it did not say something like "I would like to tell you that other resources exist dealing with Pokémon in D&D. A simple Google search should give you some results." --Green Dragon 16:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I assumed anyone attempting to make Pokemon monsters for DnD has probably already done a simple Google search. I was trying to provide more specific help with material. Can I leave something akin to "Hey, I noticed you're working on Pokemon for DnD. Leave me a message on my Talk Page if you want some help with creation, I know other resources exist that you may find helpful."? --Badger 20:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Email would be the correct option. If someone wanted a possibility for such things then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things. --Green Dragon 21:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The best part of this oppression is that you keep using the verb 'to solicit'. Let us take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context; Badger was attempting to bribe PokeDM for sex with name-dropping of! How... dastardly. It's not solicitation, it's advertising. Unless, of course, you think that people finding other sites that have D&D information on is an 'evil action', which wouldn't be too much of a step, to be honest. I mean, Badger doesn't want anything from his actions, except to help, and isn't really persuading the person in anyway nor was he persistent in his name-dropping. Also amusing is how Green Dragon is trying to say that what Badger did is on the same level as spambots. Because what he said had no relevance to the matter at hand for a person called PokeDM! Who'd think he'd want to find pokemon for D&D that other people had made to draw inspiration from. Also, I'll probably be banned for this. After all, I'm some kind of crazy anarchist. SOLICITATION, YES PLZ. --TK-Squared 11:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

No TK, it wasn't the irresistible urge to play out fantasies with PokeDM that got me caught "soliciting", it's the fact that I mentioned a website exists where PokeDM could find some help. It's not even advertising, in my opinion. It's be like a guy walking around saying "Hey, I see you spilled some mustard on your shirt. Know what could get that out? Soap..." Not the most helpful comment ever, but if you didn't know Soap existed you could certainly get the impression I know a thing or two, and ask me for help on how to find this "Soap".

Also, when I said play out fantasies I meant play a role-playing game with fantasy elements, not have kinky Tome Charizard sex. --Badger 16:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

"Let's take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context" — ya, but I don't mean that usage. That is not how English works. You take the correct usage, the one that works.

to make petition to : entreat b : to approach with a request or plea <solicited Congress for funding>

to urge (as one's cause) strongly

to entice or lure especially into evil b : to proposition (someone) especially as or in the character of a prostitute

to try to obtain by usually urgent requests or pleas <solicited donations>

intransitive verb

to make solicitation : importune

of a prostitute : to offer to have sexual relations with someone for money

(Merriam Webster)

And, yes, it is spam. If he is truly interested in helping PokeDM achieve personal goals then using email to help him find resources is the correct method; please read the discussion before responding. Posting a lasting comment here with soliciting present is not acceptable.

And yes, but you should only say "Soap" and if you want to give your preference of a Soap brand then you should only tell him or her, announcing it to everyone is soliciting. And soliciting is not allowed. --Green Dragon 21:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

“

you should only say "Soap" and if you want to give your preference of a Soap brand then you should only tell him or her, announcing it to everyone is soliciting. And soliciting is not allowed"

”

That is precisely what I did. I told him I knew of soap (a wiki) and if he wanted I could tell him the brand (the wiki's actual name). If you want to go back and read my original comment you'll notice I left it intentionally vague. Unless you think the word "wiki" narrows down the exact website I intended to link. Also, I don't think any of those definitions you posted up there truly apply to what I did. It was one comment on a talk page; hardly urgent, evil, forced, or pleading. It was actually ignored for 2 weeks before you went and edited it. --Badger 22:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You should of, however, just said it exists. Then the user can find it him/her self. This is correct. If it is such a singularity then an email with specifics would be in order.

By saying things like "wiki" and so you are soliciting, implicitly, and that is not allowed on D&D Wiki. Saying things exist, however, is okay. Why? Then "other things" are not given an even playing field and you are attempting to influence the readers views. --Green Dragon 19:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

How was he supposed to know he could e-mail me to ask for specifics if I didn't mention that he could? Furthermore, given all the recent spamming on this website (which you, yourself, acknowledged a few posts up), I don't want to leave my email address on this site; and I certainly wouldn't ask someone else to do something I was afraid to do. Finally, let's get the straight, right here, right now: the word "wiki", at least in the context of "I know a wiki exists", is solicitation. Quite frankly, if they did know what I mean, then they probably already know everything I do. --Badger 20:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

→Reverted indentation to one colon

Since you mentioned my name I thought I'd pipe up. Ironically, I only know what you are talking about because I've seen it censored from people's pages. Had I not seen "removing solicitation" in the RC longs, I probably wouldn't have gone to those user's pages and seen the link in the first place.

But I digress. You can email a user without posting your email address to spammers. If you have set up your email address in your preferences, and have checked the "enable e-mail from other users" box, you can send or be sent an email through the wiki using the Email this User link on a user's page or talk page. This doesn't leave you open to spammers, because they don't actually have a way to access your email address unless you give it to them. JazzMan 20:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. And use Special:EmailUser/<!-username->. As I said above, "If someone wanted a possibility for [email] then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things." --Green Dragon 20:26, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I have been on this wiki for some time now, and I had no idea that function existed. Thanks for the heads up. And Green Dragon, I still have no idea what "If someone wanted a possibility for [email] then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things." means... --Badger 20:46, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I spent a lot of time on a wiki that was a little obsessed with back-channel talk, so I learned pretty quickly about the email user function. JazzMan 21:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Meaning that I hope people make sure their preferences are their preferences. I hope that those who add an email also make sure to select or deselect "Enable e-mail from other users". --Green Dragon 20:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Not all users read those boxes carefully, and the box is unchecked by default. It's the kind of thing that most people don't know is there until someone tells them about it. JazzMan 21:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Is that included in Green Dragon's Welcome Message? If not, I move we add it. I know I glanced at the preferences page the day I first signed up, and not again until just now. I know that's on me for not being more careful, and through, but I imagine many people don't know that exists. --Badger 22:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm curious as to what prompted the change from "love" to "enjoy", but I do think it is much better. Might it also be beneficial to have a straight-up welcome page for new users? The message is personal and nice, and for that short and sweet is best. But a more in-depth welcome page might also be helpful, perhaps with a list of admins, or very active users, and their areas of expertise. For instance, asking you for campaign writing advice would be useful, but given my time here I think Hooper is who I would direct questions to. Again, you may be able to help with d20 Modern, but there is no doubt in my mind that Jazzman would perhaps be more helpful. Nothing against you or your abilities, but everyone has a strong suit, we should embrace that. --Badger 03:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

One enjoys websites not loves them? Dunno. Sounds better? Dunno.

And no. That's not going to happen. Everyone interprets things for themselves and having a D&D Wiki-mandated page telling users how certain things are which is interpreted on a personal scale is not good policy.

And if people do not know the generals of wiki's then they need to learn — but D&D Wiki is not Wikipedia in the sense of a trillion help pages to learn MediaWiki and so. One can go there. We assume if one cares they can first look for it theselves. --Green Dragon 03:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

What would you say for a LA+0 Race to have +3 STR, +6 DEX, +3 CON, -6 WIS, -4 INT, -2 CHA() Size= Large. Would you say that would be fair? im considering on making a race thats not too over powered but just right. I would love to make a Na'Vi race. From the movie Avatar. i love that movie and i think it would just be awesome to bring it into D&D Wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Powershart (talk • contribs) . Please sign your posts!

I'm not Green Dragon, but I saw this and thought I'd respond anyway. LA +0 seems low for a large creature, especially one that gets a total of +12 to physical stats. Plus you have exactly offset the physical bonuses with mental penalties, and if we use the orc as a precedent, physical stats are more valuable than mental. (By the way, odd numbered stat increases are generally frowned upon, because they don't add a static bonus/penalty.) I'm not sure that Na'Vi would have low Int or Cha, and they definitely don't have low Wis. They are very spiritual, insightful creatures; if anything, they should get a Wis bonus. JazzMan 14:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

First racial changes should always be even. Second, large size normally means LA 1-2. With the bonus' to dex it could get very overpowered, for example with ranged fighting. I would recommend upping the LA and tonning down the ability score changes and then it could be LA 1. --Green Dragon 16:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

think you for welcomeing me even now it's alittle late for my response but it is one.

When trying to browse the D&D 3.5 pages, many things do not load in the list, cutting off about a third of the way down to about half the way down. The search function is also broken. These problems have been occurring for a few months, and I am a little upset that I can't access all of the data available on this website. Sorry if you've heard these complaints many times before, but I figured I should report it, since it hasn't been dealt with for a while. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.134.174.192 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC). Please sign your posts!

Hey, I'm just stopping by to say, and I know this has been said before, but their seem to be some problems with loading pages on the wiki. It seems as though every second time I try to load a new page it says 'error wiki down' or something of the sort. Not to mention it taking a very long time to load pages some times. In addition to this, it is impossible to search and to move pages as it keeps on saying error. I was under the impression that the slowness of the wiki and the constant downs were supposed to be fixed a while ago from your response to my earlier post about this on the discussion page, however it seems to still be causing trouble.

I don't mean this in a threatening or rude way, so please don't take it the wrong way, but if this keeps up the wiki may start loosing some of its community, which would be a terrible thing as I love the wiki and the people here. So I'm hoping that this can be figured out some how and the wiki can start working at optimal capacity again. Perhaps it is having problems with loading because of spikes that the servers can't handle at certain times of the day? Anyways, hope its worked out, thanks. :)--Vrail 21:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Search was repaired.

Moving pages now works.

With regard to the speed I am going to switch hosting soon again (to something a little different) and from there we can see once again.

I noticed that recently you were moving a number of DnD pages to 4e or 3.5e or their corresponding eddition. Is this being done to all pages? If so, I could help. :) --Vrail 05:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Ya, it is. If you would like to DnD Rules could use some page-moving help. --Green Dragon 05:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

So are all the pages on those lists just being moved to 3.5e rather than DnD? Or am I missing something? It just seems like a simple task to have not been completed yet. :) --Vrail 05:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

It's been a few days now, just wanted to say I'm still waiting for an answer. I really want to help out, but I don't want to start moving pages and find out I'm doing something wrong. :) --Vrail 03:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

That is what needs to be done there. A lot of simple tasks have yet to be completed, a great example is Special:ListRedirects. --Green Dragon 03:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, just wanted to clarify. I'll start moving some pages, although many may have to wait a bit, it's pretty late at night were I live right now. :) --Vrail 04:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I DID IT!. That took a lot more work than I thought it would, but it's finished now, and I can rest happy, knowing the wiki was helped. :D --Vrail 06:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I just finished converting all of the 3.5e campaign setting tags from DnD to 3.5e. I was wondering if there were any more big pages to convert? --Vrail 19:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of anything that involves moving pages, but if you are looking for something with lots of work, check out Special:DoubleRedirects. If that interests you, basically what you need to do is change the first redirect to point to the third redirect, skipping the second redirect entirely. But then you have to go to the second redirect, hit the "what links here", and change all those links to point to the third page. Finally, add a deletion tag to the second redirect, and I'll come along behind you and delete the unneeded redirects.

Of course, it's a lot of work, but it's pretty mindless work. Luckily since we mostly use DPLs instead of direct linking, when you moved all those pages 90% of the links to those pages will have moved with them, and you won't have to change much. Unfortunatly, as of this moment there are 984 double redirects!! If this interests you but I didn't explain it well just leave a message on my talk page and I'll be more clear. JazzMan 20:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Awesome, so I've moved all the big pages of DnD to their correct editions. What a great feeling it is to have finished, that was a lot of work. :) Anyways, I'll get to work on the double redirects. :) --Vrail 18:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Of course, if you want to do something less mindless, you could update the classes pages and look over their content. Let me know if you are interested. --Green Dragon 03:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol, that does sound pretty interesting, but I have a lot going right now, perhaps when I finish up my campaign setting, or fix a few more double redirects I'll do it, but right now I just don't think I have the time.

But if the job is still open in a couple of weeks or a month or two I'd love to do it. :)--Vrail 03:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Well it's open until the task has been completed. I started on DnD Base Classes, and will finish the task sometime in its current state. Just let me know when you have time and still want to, unless you understand what I am talking about then of course at your leisure. --Green Dragon 03:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

When you try to create a new Quest on the 3.5e Quests page, all it says is AAA. Their is also no page to make encounters. Is their any way for this to be fixed with relative ease? I was just looking into adding an adventure/quest and couldn't create it that way.--Vrail 04:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

What's the advantage of using a form vs. a preload? JazzMan 21:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Preloads are better. This was discussed somewhere (I think on a form's removed page (please see Talk:DnD Flaws#Flaw Form)). The reason was that preloads make it so wiki syntax is learned sometime whereas forms do not do that. And both are about the same difficulty to understand. --Green Dragon 02:49, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how to delete things on this wiki; I'm assuming it's a mod's job, but I've honestly got no idea. I'm trying to delete Epic Access (3.5e Feat) and Greater Epic Access (3.5e Feat), as I've turned both of them into Epic Access (3.5e Variant Rule). If deleting things is a mod's job only, would you delete them for me? If I can actually do it, I'd be more than happy to learn how so I don't bother you or Hooper over this again. Thanks! --For Valor 23:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Today alone I have already removed four spam posts, and thats just one person on one day. It seems recently the pace of spam has increased. Am I imagining things or did some spam blocking protocol get messed up or something? Anyways, just wondering if there is anything that can be done to help keep spam down. :)--Vrail 20:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Oops, just noticed this was already talked about, feel free to delete this comment if you wish. :)--Vrail 20:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't think blocking the spammers really does anything. I've never seen one IP address spam more than one page, so they've got some kind of program that randomizes the IP after every spam post. However, the reason you probably saw more today is because traffic was much lower, so the same amount of spam makes up a higher percentage. JazzMan 01:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I take back that last part. The spammers are out in force today for some reason. Good work, as always, Vrail.

The only pattern I have noticed is that they seem to hit the same pages over and over (can't quite figure out why they choose those pages though). When I see a page has been hit more than once I protect it for a couple months from anonymous edits. Don't really know if that helps or not, I'm hoping that the bot hits a protected page, tries to edit, and isn't smart enough to figure out that it's locked so nothing happens. JazzMan 03:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed that a number of the larger pages in 3.5e are still called DnD (i.e DnD Character Options, DnD Classes, DnD Campaign Settings, etc.). Since all of the pages in these categories have been moved to 3.5e rather than DnD, shouldn't these larger pages be moved too? Anyways, I was just wondering, just say the word and I can do it. :) --Vrail 06:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Of course, and please feel free. Also, since they are related to one another, the templates with "DnD" present (e.g. Template:DnD Prestige Classes Breadcrumb) should also be moved. They are also considered subparts of the 'larger pages' as well. --Green Dragon 15:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

When you were changing the links on the 3.5e homebrew page so they skipped the redirect you missed Maps. Just pointing it out since I can't do it myself. :) --Vrail 23:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Oops, nevermind, just checked and the maps pages are the same for 3.5e and 4e. Sorry, I guess I should check before I talk next time. --Vrail 23:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

It would make sense to add an addition, but I do not think an edition really defines a map. Maybe if they have creatures detailed (e.g. File:Blacksmith's Cellar.jpg. Dunno, your thoughts? --Green Dragon 02:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

So it appears we have yet again lost all the uploaded images on the wiki. Everywhere that there should be an image is the link, but no image (on my computer at least). What's the deal? I know this happened once before, I want to say when mediawiki was updated. Is that what happened this time? --Badger 18:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what happened, however I would just like to say that this has happened for my computer to, so it's not just you! :) --Vrail 20:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I looked into it a bit more, and figured out that the pictures are still there in the media wiki. However the links are going to the normal D&D wiki categories rather than linking to the files in the media repository. --Vrail 21:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Images are working once again. --Green Dragon 17:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)